This attitude has raged out of control since Barack Obama took the White House in 2008. Since that time, we have seen effort upon effort to trample the Constitution and selectively ignore the Rule of Law by this administration. Our founders certainly envisioned the potential for the rise of tyranny in our government over time, and accordingly, took steps to incorporate some safeguards into the Constitution to counteract such a possibility. Those safeguards included spreading the authority of the government among three separate branches (executive, legislative, judicial), and defining the specific powers associated with each branch. They put processes into place to legislate laws, create revenue sources, and oversee fiscal responsibility. Procedures were established to address actions or behavior on the part of any branch or element of that branch which overstepped its authority. Their concern extended beyond the federal level and they made provisions for a collective of the States to render changes to the Constitution if the federal branches were incapable of policing themselves. For many decades, the Constitution and the prudent policies defined by it have proven to be an effective tool in keep our system within limits.
Barack Obama was elected to the Office of the President in 2008. He came to office with an “attitude”—an attitude which basically showed his disdain for the history of this nation. He quickly became an “apologist to the world” for the USA. He also made it clear on numerous occasions that he saw the Constitution as a “flawed document” that essentially created nothing but barriers to the changes he wished to bring about. Now, understand something here—that is exactly what the document was supposed to do from day one, but until Obama, we had not really seen a challenge to it. Since taking office in 2009, Obama has made a habit of ignoring both the legislative and judicial branches and has attempted to push forward his agenda, daring anyone to stop him. He hints that what he is doing is an extension of the will of the people, and therefore he is perfectly within the boundaries of his powers in his actions—at least that seems to be his perspective.
Today, the Judicial Branch is very close to gridlock, and will likely become more so as opportunities arise to add new liberals to the court mix. Although the judiciary should be free of politics, reality has shown that not to be the case. Lately, those populating the bench are quite willing to support the aspirations of this President, whether they are Constitutional or not.
Contrary to what the Obama administration would have you believe, the Legislative Branch is experiencing gridlock now not because of the “Republicans in the House,” but because Obama has Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid shutting down the process on a continual basis, thus giving the President the excuse that Congress will not act. Here again, rather than looking to Constitutional authority, we have embraced rationalization to justify the actions and behavior of the President. After all if Congress will not act, what choice does he have?
And so you rightly ask, Yes, but what of the Rule of Law and the possibility of impeachment? All Presidents want to avoid that, do they not? Unfortunately, we have come to a place in our history where the safeguards so carefully designed by our founders are failing us—not because of some intrinsic flaw but because of who makes up the system in Washington. This is where we come back to the “win” attitude which is undermining the Constitution in its own way. The Republicans refuse to pursue impeachment. Why? They state it openly: They cannot win! Winning would entail filing impeachment charges against this President and seeing them carried successfully through the trial phase within the Senate. Of course, with the current political make-up of the Senate, that will not happen—so it’s about winning or, more accurately, the inability to win rather than about principle. “Principle” has come to mean nothing, even though our founding document, the Constitution, is based on it. This is not a “flaw” of the Constitution, but rather a “flaw” in the people we elected to office to uphold that document—on both sides of the aisle.
As a result, we have a President who tries to legislate and interpret the law as he sees fit, overstepping the powers assigned solely to either the Legislative or Judicial branches. He does so with a haughty arrogance, essentially daring anyone to try to stop him. But this is on purpose. You see, the President and much of his political party believe this game plan can be used effectively in the upcoming election cycles. If the Republicans employ the principle of the Constitution and seek impeachment, those surrounding Mr. Obama will cry “foul” and throw down the race card with the utmost speed. In doing so, they will invigorate their base against those who would seek to rein this President in when he is only trying to help the little people of America. It is the same logic we see applied down on our southern border—compassion trumps illegality!
The irony here is that this approach is simply a calculated bluff on the part of Obama & Company, but the Republicans actually believe it, publicly stating that impeachment is off the table. Now, if you were planning on stretching the limits of the powers of your office to get what you want, that is some mighty valuable information to know! At the same time, this bunch of spineless, naïve Republicans believe that the same people who support this President’s abuse of power are going to consider voting for them in the next election. Wow! Comedian Ron White is right--ya can’t fix stupid!
Let us turn the table and look at things from a different perspective. The Democrats in Travis County have gone after Texas Governor Rick Perry for his abuse of powers because he threatened to withhold funding from an office that was established to monitor the integrity of public officials unless the woman running it stepped down. She is apparently a drunk—and made quite a spectacle of herself when arrested for DWI. Perry made good on that threat when she refused to step down. Now, the Travis County grand jury has had no qualms in pursuing such a suit, even though the State of Texas has a voter base that is far more supportive of Perry than not. But we have yet another irony here as well—this suit isn’t about principle. It is all about distraction and blackballing Perry against any future run for the presidency; the concept of public integrity is neither a concern nor consideration in seeking prosecution.
There are plenty of examples out there in the case of Obama which would have resulted in the impeachment of other Presidents. Of course none of the others had the benefit of the race card--that all-purpose gadget kept ever so handy in the liberal political toolbox. The situations with the Internal Revenue Service and the Veteran’s Administration could easily have been enough for most past Presidents, yet Obama skates freely along, continuing to pursue new avenues in his quest to trample on the Constitution and destroy the rights of the people as he creates a gigantic, out-of-control federal government that weighs in on every aspect of their daily lives. If there is a legacy for Obama, it will be that he unleased “Big Brother” and ushered in an attitude of indifference and contempt not only toward the Constitution, but also the nation it was designed to protect. At this point, it seems all we can effectively do is pray that we outlast his administration.
© Copyright WBrown2014. All Rights Reserved